mfaulk – EDUC 342: Child Development & New Technologies

Week 9 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 03 Mar 2016 08:45:55 +0000

The Margolis article really struck home for me. It states, “this may have been an important ingredient of the “secret sauce” of ECS—passionate, creative teachers who are interested in the problem solving of computer science, with a variety of secondary subject credentials” (64). To me, this is the largest barrier to diversity in CS. The CS curriculum is always presented in the framework of a “techy” subject meant for those with a predisposition for math and science. There is so much creativity and innovation required in CS yet we are actively deterring the more liberal focused young minds. Margolis brilliantly notes that this diversity of thought must start with the teachers. If teachers and other student role models are demonstrating the variety of credentials that contribute to success in CS, we would make the CS curriculum much more accessible to the diverse minds of this generation.

Week 8 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 03:41:19 +0000

The Zimmerman paper briefly mentioned a design principle called “heads up” that I found very innovative (80). This design goal aims to engage users in an evenly distributed amount of screen time and environment time. As users interact with the screen, they are prompted by real life objects and scenarios in their environment that support the science based application content. The technology behind such products seems difficult yet I’m curious what other applications this could have. We have not touched on this type of interaction deeply in class and I am wondering how this could manifest itself in other realms of education?

Week 7 Discussion

mfaulk — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 23:34:23 +0000

The Zhang reading indirectly highlighted a very fascinating issue about how the Internet facilitates the achievement gap. Zhang states, “highly educated adults were more likely to use the Internet for personal development, while adults with lower education levels more often were online for gaming and social interaction” (11). As a result, “the digital divide in Internet use could occur at a very early stage of the educational trajectory, suggesting that the Internet can be a potential accelerator for the digital divide and achievement gap” (11). I had not recognized the power that the search index has in shaping the content that drives the achievement gap. How can we transition this power for good? Would it be constructive to have website rankings based on educational value for audiences with lower education levels to decelerate this digital divide?

Week 6 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:19:39 +0000

“Writing in the Wild” came to powerful conclusions yet caused me to question the application in practice. Currwood et al. argue that contemporary affinity spaces include a passionate, public audience for content. However, this caused me to question the negative and perhaps unwarranted criticism that could arise from this passionate public audience. Sheena mentions that she is motivated by “more detailed critiques…not just praise” (682). Yet, I can imagine youth who would not react in a similar way. In the classroom, student writing is generally only disclosed to the teacher, who is trained to deliver constructive feedback. If we begin to utilize this public audience as a pedagogical tool for improved writing in the classroom, how can we avoid the potential negative harm that this can cause to students and their malleable intellectual confidence?

Week 5 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 04 Feb 2016 05:59:28 +0000

When playing video games, there appear to be two major pillars that foster cognitive engagement: representation and interactivity. In The virtual census, Williams et al mentioned that the “absence of portrayals should lead to a feeling of relative unimportance and powerlessness” (820). This comment was powerful. When discussing the sources of stereotype threat for minorities, we commonly think of the negative stereotypes perpetuated in media or the lack of positive role models in various industries. However, we rarely think of this deep psychological concept of “unimportance” and “powerlessness” that could be instantiated from a young age. This lack of representation can foster an unhealthy mentality for these children and a disassociation from the cognitive benefits of gaming. Granic reveals that “children develop beliefs about their intelligence and abilities, beliefs that underlie specific motivational styles and directly affect achievement” (71). Yet, minorities cannot equally develop such positive beliefs when they cannot visually associate themselves with such achievement. Evidently, we have created a environment where there is not only a concrete detriment to minority mindset but also a new achievement gap in the cognitive benefits of gaming.

Assignment 1

mfaulk — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 03:52:37 +0000

Game: Lady Popular

Website: ladypopular.com

Focus: Virtual world

Age: Teens

Description: Browser-based fashion game set in a virtual fashion world. As a user, you set up a personalized avatar and explore the fashion career path through various quests.

Megan Faulk – Assignment 1

Week 4 Discussion

mfaulk — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 22:16:02 +0000

The discussion of morality regarding robots was fascinating and raises a lot of questions regarding other forms of moral literacy and how children develop this moral capacity. Kahn et al mentioned “most children believed that Robovie deserved fair treatment and should not be harmed psychologically” and additionally that “participants attributed some level of moral accountability to Robovie for the harm that Robovie caused” (3). However, we often see teens playing violent games such as Grand Theft Auto where the player is seen identifying as a character with non-existent moral capacity. There is no accountability for these characters’ senseless killing and destruction and teens thoroughly enjoy playing this game. Why is there such disparity in moral responsibility? Does it have to do with the direct repercussions of a physical object as opposed to a virtual world? The characters in GTA take on the biological, psychological and perceptual properties of humans and yet, they do not receive the same treatment as physical objects in the world. However, they still play a large role in developing the moral literacy of young adults. How can we capture the fantasy aspect of GTA while still maintaining valuable moral responsibility on the characters? Or does it require a physical being, such as a robot, to truly stimulate a moral responsibility from children?

Week 3 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:48:31 +0000

In Families Matter, Takeuchi concludes that most media was originally designed for adult use and later adapted for children’s cognitive capacities. This design process becomes alarming with the trending normalcy of content streaming. Takeuchi reveals “children’s internet use is monitored or limited in 97% of homes…only 3% let their kids freely surf the web” (24). However, new media is increasingly streaming content to users rather than allowing user ownership of content. This becomes much more difficult for parents to monitor. For example, Spotify provides most millennials and adults with music. Yet, parental control is not a feature on this platform. If a child uses Spotify for their own music, there is no longer a distinct purchase that a parent can monitor but rather a one-time cost for unlimited streaming and therefore unlimited content. While Netflix has implemented a form of parent control, many other streaming media platforms do not place such regulations. Takeuchi’s commentary made me painfully aware that if we do not design software with children in mind, the new power of streaming will greatly add to the fear of “what lurks in cyberspace” (24).

Parasocial Activity

mfaulk — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 20:24:54 +0000

Alicia Keys : Growing up as a mixed race girl, I didn’t identify with almost any real-life people in the media. When I was around 10-11, my aunt said I reminded her of Alicia Keys. After that, I became obsessed with her! She also played the piano and I was learning the piano at that time. She inspired me to stick with the piano and made me feel more comfortable in my own skin.

Week 2 Discussion

mfaulk — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 05:19:41 +0000

Alper mentions the unproductive generalization of today’s children as “iKids” or “digital natives”. She claims these assumptions ignore a few core problems in the way today’s children must navigate new media literacy. First, the “transparency problem” or “the challenges young people face in learning to see clearly the ways that media shape perceptions of the world.” Second, the “ethics challenge” or “the breakdown of traditional forms of professional training and socialization that might prepare young people for their increasingly public roles as media makers.”

I found these two concepts extremely fascinating. As part of the “digital natives” generation, I am eager to become more self-reflective about these challenges and how I am actively working to remedy them. I would love to further explore these ideas: What are concrete ways in which these challenges manifest themselves in our daily technology use?